MONTGOMERY, Ala.  For weeks, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich have been echoes of each other, both aiming their urgent verbal fire at Mitt Romney, the man they are desperate to stop from becoming the leader of the Republican Party.

But the political and geographical imperatives of two important Southern primaries next week are forcing the two men to turn on each other as they seek to demonstrate an ability to unite the partys fickle conservative base.

It is a clash that has been building for weeks as both men circled each other warily, mindful that a shot at the White House was at stake. And it is a confrontation that Mr. Romneys campaign welcomes  though it hopes neither candidate emerges as a threat.

On Wednesday, Mr. Santorums campaign and his allies turned gingerly to the urgent challenge: prodding Mr. Gingrich to abandon the race so that conservatives could unite behind Mr. Santorums candidacy against Mr. Romney. A top strategist for Mr. Santorum has been reaching out to a counterpart in the Gingrich campaign over the past three weeks to try to persuade Mr. Gingrich to withdraw for the good of the conservative movement.

Mr. Santorum said that anyone calling on Mr. Gingrich to withdraw was not doing so with my knowledge. But he made clear to reporters that he would not mind if it were to happen....

Actually Rick and Newt should stay into the bitter end because they can together deny RINOMNEY the nomination and force a brokered convention.

A brokered convention is the best alternative now because it means all the delegates will be freed to vote their conscience, and the floor speeches they will hear at the convention will be aimed at turning them.

Newt is by far the best visionary, the most powerful speaker and he should have a very good chance in this setting.

Many people are voting for Santorum because he is not Romney and they have been brainwashed by the negative ads taken out against Newt. Once the delegates at a brokered convention get a chance to meet Newt and to hear him up close, all their previous prejudices and biases can be dissolved.

3
posted on 03/07/2012 9:32:40 PM PST
by Hostage
(Looking for a slut who brings her own birth control.)

I don’t know if this is relevant, but I already had it in the chamber and wanted to post it somewhere.

This is march 7, 2012.

Here is a poll from March 10, 1980. Reagan should have dropped out.

ABC-Harris poll, March 10, 1980:
When pitted against President Carter among a cross section of 1,498 likely voters, Ford runs ahead by a 54-44 percent margin. By contrast , among the same voters , Reagan trails Carter by 58-40 percent .

I totally agree. Rick should drop and support Newt. Realistically, Newt Gingrich may be the only chance this country has to survive. Romney is Obama re-do, and Santorum has danced with unions a little too much and unions are one of the biggest reasons we are in this mess. They use political activism and lobbyists to leverage benefits to such high levels that companies are no longer competitive. The companies flee the country to escape the unions and extreme labor costs and all we are left with are government public workers that live off tax money taken from you and me.

5
posted on 03/07/2012 9:36:25 PM PST
by lwoodham
(Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.)

Neither should drop out. The GOP establishment is pushing this nonsense so their man can get the nomination and those pesky conservatives must learn their place and do what they are told..don't you see

I'm for Newt I'll vote for Rick but I will never vote for Mutt. Its time the establishment faces the fact that their are many like me..

Actually Santorum is the Romney man, he endorsed him last time, and the parallels are chilling.

In 1996 he endorsed and campaigned for Arlen Specter for President, on the platform to remove the pro-life position from the Republican platform.

Rick Santorum admits that he was pro-abortion until his first run for office, 6 years after supposedly switching, he endorsed Specter’s Presidential run based on driving the pro-life movement out of the GOP.

3:46 mark: In 1996, I intend to win the other house  the White House  with ten commitments to America including a womans right to choose

13:22 mark: Even though we have this historic opportunity for these achievements, there are those in our party who would lead us down a different path  and squander this unique moment in our nations history  by using our political capital  to pursue a radical social agenda  that would end a womans right to choose

13:48 mark: When Pat Robertson says there is no constitutional doctrine of separation between Church and State, I say he is wrong

14:31 mark: When Ralph Reed says a pro-choice Republican isnt qualified to be our President, I say the Republican Party will not be intimidated or blackmailed by those kinds of threats.I, and millions of other pro-choice Republicans, will not be disenfranchised and made second class citizens.

15:33 mark:  it is not Christian, or religious, or Judeo-Christian to bring God into politics; or to advocate intolerance and promote exclusion.

15:54 mark: I want to take abortion out of politics. I want to keep the Republican Party focused on the vital economic and foreign policy issues  and leave moral issues such as abortion to the conscience of the individual. I believe abortion is an issue to be decided by women

16:40 mark: I pledge to lead the fight to strip the strident anti-choice language from the Republican National platform 

I hope Newt stays in to the bitter end.
At least he has the cajones to attack Omuslim where it hurts. Nobody else does.
Maybe some of what he says will filter into the thick heads of Americans come election day.

15
posted on 03/07/2012 10:11:58 PM PST
by patriot08
(TEXAS GAL- born and bred and proud of it!)

I think lawyers say, “never ask a question that you don’t already know the answer to”.

I’m a guy that loves to drop bombshells and unusual factoids, and I know to never drop a bomb shell or truly fascinating factoid, unless you are prepared for the obvious follow up questions, or obvious outraged challenges.

Newt was on silent running in all those debates toward all candidates.

Newt finally picked it up against Romney, but held his fire (too dang long in my opinion) against Rick Santorum.

Newt is charging the South and just now getting around to pointing a little fire toward Rick, who was seen eager to pile on Newt going into Florida, even as it was rumored he, himself (Rick) was reportedly thinking of getting out after Newt blew out South Carolina.

THAT was graceless Rick’s quite unnecessary parting shot, exhibiting his grinding grudge against the giant, THE Speaker of the House.

Newt would have endorsed the ungrateful Santorum, the spoiled one, the whiner, cranky junior candidate, who would look better if he had just said to Newt, “Thank you”, for your graciousness to me and for your service in Congress.

Newt should probably hope for a contested convention where he could dump the back stabbing kid, but he won’t. Newt has dignity and love for the country and crawled through glass for the Republican Party. He would endorse The Brat.

However, the Brat when push comes to shove will ingratiate himself to the Liberal. Romney,of course.

Rick has always pinned his star to the Establishment, but for the campaign theatrics which he always performs but never legislated when he was in a position to do so.

19
posted on 03/07/2012 10:39:00 PM PST
by RitaOK
(LET 'ER RIP, NEWT. Newt knows where all the bodies are buried, because he buried them.)

Frankly, some of Newt’s supporters are delusional. Why should Rick drop out? He has beaten Romney in 7 states, came extremely close in 3 others, and when he doesn’t win, he usually comes in second to Romney. Rick has shown he can connect with Midwestern and Southern voters. If Newt had won those states and was consisntently ahead in the polls in upcoming states, then you would have a case. At this point, to ask a 2nd place candidate to toss his support to a candidate who has done worse with the electorate than him makes no sense.

I also wonder why the Newt supporters must continue to try to prop up their candidate by using demeaning names towards Rick like “Little Ricky”, “Sanctimonium”, “Saint Rick”, etc. I do not attack Newt because he is not the enemy. Newt supporters put much more effort on here into attacking Santorum than Romney.

20
posted on 03/08/2012 12:26:10 AM PST
by Pinkbell
(Knock Romney Out - Vote for Santorum in Ohio/Oklahoma/Tennessee and Vote for Gingrich In Georgia)

I also wonder why the Newt supporters must continue to try to prop up their candidate by using demeaning names towards Rick like Little Ricky, Sanctimonium, Saint Rick, etc. I do not attack Newt because he is not the enemy. Newt supporters put much more effort on here into attacking Santorum than Romney.

Yes, why are Newt supporters so mean and nasty to us? To our candidate? I don’t have a problem with them not liking Santorum as much, and explaining why. But why all the mean spirited names and insults? I have criticized newt but also given him credit where it’s due.

The truth right now is that out there in the elections, where it counts, Santorum gets dang close to Romney where Romney wins. And just a small amount of newt’s votes would help santo beat Romney.

I also wonder why the Newt supporters must continue to try to prop up their candidate by using demeaning names towards Rick like Little Ricky, Sanctimonium, Saint Rick, etc. I do not attack Newt because he is not the enemy. Newt supporters put much more effort on here into attacking Santorum than Romney.

Yes, why are Newt supporters so mean and nasty to us? To our candidate? I dont have a problem with them not liking Santorum as much, and explaining why. But why all the mean spirited names and insults? I have criticized newt but also given him credit where its due.

The truth right now is that out there in the elections, where it counts, Santorum gets dang close to Romney where Romney wins. And just a small amount of newts votes would help santo beat Romney.

Teradittos!

The attempts by some of the Newtbots to paint Santorum as a liberal are ludicrous. Sure, he endorsed Specter, who, as an incumbent, won the endorsement of other conservatives, but to my knowledge, he never bought into the global warming hoax, made a television commercial with Nancy Pelosi, or endorsed Dede Scozzafava, a "Republican" who is so far left as to make Dennis Kucinich look like Duncan Hunter.

And I, too am annoyed at the meanness and nastiness of some of the Newtbots. They remind me of the arrogant, know-it-all "Kennedy Liberals" that I so often encountered in the 1960's and 1970's.

Newt is the only candidate who will tell you outright what he will do on day one to start restoring the constitutional republic. Mitt and Rick will need to study it. If you don’t have a plan to resolve the nation’s problems you should not be running for president.

24
posted on 03/08/2012 8:22:20 AM PST
by Georgia Girl 2
(The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)

Well if you continue to refuse to look at post 14, then you can keep lying to yourself.

"In 1996, I intend to win the other house  the White House  with ten commitments to America including a womans right to choose. "I pledge to lead the fight to strip the strident anti-choice language from the Republican National platform"

Really? You think doing the same endorsement in a Congressional race that was made by our Congressional leadership, (Cantor, Boehner, etc) is the same as trying to make the Republican party pro-abortion?

That is disputed, but Santorum endorsing a candidate to remove the pro-life movement from the GOP is not, and again, the scale, do you really so casually dismiss a platform to remove life from the GOP platform?

By the way, Santorum was anti-Reagan during his presidency, and called his supporters “fringe’.

Attorney Santorum admits this, I was basically pro-choice all my life, until I ran for Congress.

That is disputed, but Santorum endorsing a candidate to remove the pro-life movement from the GOP is not, and again, the scale, do you really so casually dismiss a platform to remove life from the GOP platform?

By the way, Santorum was anti-Reagan during his presidency, and called his supporters fringe.

Attorney Santorum admits this, I was basically pro-choice all my life, until I ran for Congress.

While you're at it, why don't you bring up the fact that Santorums ancestors were Communists, that many of his Italian relatives are Communists and that his grandfather came from Riva di Garda, a hotbed of leftists?

I’m officially endorsing Newt Gingrich for president today. Was going to wait until after Florida, but see no reason to delay. We need Newt to win in South Carolina and Florida to stop any possible momentum building up for the establishment big government, statist, abortionist RINO!!

RomneyCare = ObamaCare = government tyranny!! Taxpayer funded abortion is as evil as evil can be!!

Newt is a pro-life Reagan Revolution conservative who led the Republican Revolution of the 90s, taking the majority away from the democrats who had held it for 40 years. And as Speaker, cut the taxes, cut the government, cut the spending, cut the deficit, cut regulations, cut unemployment, brought the federal budget under control for four years running. And unlike Romney, actually blocked a socialist healthcare system from becoming law. And created a pro-growth, pro-free market, pro-jobs environment and extended the Reagan economy throughout the 90s!! Newt is the ideal candidate to lead the Tea Party Revolution!!

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.